5 ms·

Recruiter here, and unfortunately many companies still won't look at people without having specific language experience (and often a specific amount of language

by fecak 13y ago

Recruiter here, and unfortunately many companies still won't look at people without having specific language experience (and often a specific amount of language experience). I find this has traditionally been more true in the Java world, where I've had clients ask for x years of Java and > n years of a specific framework. I spent most of my 15 years working almost exclusively with Java shops that were often this specific. In working with Ruby, Python and Scala/Clojure shops over the past couple years, I find they are much less concerned with which languages you know today. I'm not sure if this is a function of a programming culture in these shops, or if it has more to do with the huge amount of Java developers available and the perception of more limited number of available talent in some other languages (do Python shops hire non-Python programmers because they 'have to'?).

bad_user 13y ago
I'm not a recruiter per se, but I have been recruiting. On the question "do Python shops hire non-Python programmers because they have to?", from my experience the answer is Yes, but the reasons are twofold. On one hand, yes, it is harder to find Python developers and it makes no sense for a company to restrict itself to such a limited pool. On the other hand it is also a matter of culture - companies that use less popular technologies often do so for good reasons. Such companies are often looking for good developers in general. In my interviews the least of my concerns is the programming language the candidate used, when most people fail to satisfy me on questions like "describe the perils associated with concurrency and parallelism". The companies focusing on Java that you speak of, on the other hand, have no need for good developers as they focus on quantity, not quality. For them it is far more valuable to hire replaceable resources.
- fecak 13y ago
  Interesting points. A follow-up question for you regarding your belief in the focus on quantity over quality. In your opinion, do you think that the perceived focus on quantity over quality is representative of the culture of some Java shops or a function of the Java language itself (a necessity for more programmers due to the nature of the language)? I've run one of the larger Java Users' Groups in the US (Philadelphia) for over 13 years, but I keep a very open mind on things, and I have been critical of elements of the Java space in the past.
  - bad_user 13y ago
    I think it's about the culture. Many Java shops are simply assembly lines. And really, it's logical - if you want to build an assembly line, you pick a popular language for which you've got not problem in finding cheaper developers. This isn't representative of all Java shops btw. And if you've got a different perspective due to your involvement in a JUG, you do have to keep in mind that people (or companies) joining a JUG do so because they want to be a part of a community, or for the learning experience, which is why JUG members are not representative.
    - fecak 13y ago
      This is definitely not representative of all Java shops, but I'd agree that some (many) are as you describe. I think the perspective that I get from JUG, where I have interacted regularly with hundreds of Java pros over a 10+ year period, gives me a sense of the morale of the Java community and their feelings about Java. I wrote an article about this last year (http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/07/11/advice-from-a-jug-leader-learn-a-different-language/ http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/07/11/advice-from-a-jug-lead...) that goes into the sudden spike in interest for topics that were not Java language specific, and our transition into a group focused more around the JVM than just the language. This transition was driven by what I generally considered the unofficial though leadership of the group, who were gravitating away from the language. This is just around the time of the Sun acquisition when this became most obvious, which may have precipitated some of the changes.

by fecak 13y ago

bad_user 13y ago

I'm not a recruiter per se, but I have been recruiting. On the question "do Python shops hire non-Python programmers because they have to?", from my experience the answer is Yes, but the reasons are twofold. On one hand, yes, it is harder to find Python developers and it makes no sense for a company to restrict itself to such a limited pool. On the other hand it is also a matter of culture - companies that use less popular technologies often do so for good reasons. Such companies are often looking for good developers in general. In my interviews the least of my concerns is the programming language the candidate used, when most people fail to satisfy me on questions like "describe the perils associated with concurrency and parallelism". The companies focusing on Java that you speak of, on the other hand, have no need for good developers as they focus on quantity, not quality. For them it is far more valuable to hire replaceable resources.

fecak 13y ago
Interesting points. A follow-up question for you regarding your belief in the focus on quantity over quality. In your opinion, do you think that the perceived focus on quantity over quality is representative of the culture of some Java shops or a function of the Java language itself (a necessity for more programmers due to the nature of the language)? I've run one of the larger Java Users' Groups in the US (Philadelphia) for over 13 years, but I keep a very open mind on things, and I have been critical of elements of the Java space in the past.
- bad_user 13y ago
  I think it's about the culture. Many Java shops are simply assembly lines. And really, it's logical - if you want to build an assembly line, you pick a popular language for which you've got not problem in finding cheaper developers. This isn't representative of all Java shops btw. And if you've got a different perspective due to your involvement in a JUG, you do have to keep in mind that people (or companies) joining a JUG do so because they want to be a part of a community, or for the learning experience, which is why JUG members are not representative.
  - fecak 13y ago
    This is definitely not representative of all Java shops, but I'd agree that some (many) are as you describe. I think the perspective that I get from JUG, where I have interacted regularly with hundreds of Java pros over a 10+ year period, gives me a sense of the morale of the Java community and their feelings about Java. I wrote an article about this last year (http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/07/11/advice-from-a-jug-leader-learn-a-different-language/ http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/07/11/advice-from-a-jug-lead...) that goes into the sudden spike in interest for topics that were not Java language specific, and our transition into a group focused more around the JVM than just the language. This transition was driven by what I generally considered the unofficial though leadership of the group, who were gravitating away from the language. This is just around the time of the Sun acquisition when this became most obvious, which may have precipitated some of the changes.